IVV vs MSTB
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs LHA Market State Tactical Beta ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MSTB | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 1.38% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $192M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.38% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 8 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | +10.85% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +16.71% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | +17.58% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | +7.99% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 14.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -25.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Little Harbor Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Allocation/Balanced | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 30, 2020 |
IVV vs MSTB Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and LHA Market State Tactical Beta ETF (MSTB) is a ETF from Little Harbor Advisors. Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while MSTB returned +16.71%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a gain of 10.85% for MSTB.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.47% per year against +17.58% for MSTB; over five years the annualized figures are +13.26% and +7.99% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, MSTB has the edge at +11.31% annualized vs +7.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 14.2% for MSTB. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -56.5% for IVV and -25.6% for MSTB. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MSTB charges 1.38%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $138 annually, a gap of $135 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.38% for MSTB.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MSTB share 0 holdings out of 508 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MSTB?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MSTB charges 1.38%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $135 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MSTB?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +16.71% for MSTB, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +11.31% for MSTB. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MSTB?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 14.2% for MSTB. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MSTB -25.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and MSTB?
IVV and MSTB have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MSTB?
IVV and MSTB share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 508 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MSTB?
IVV yields 1.09% while MSTB yields 0.38%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.